Those readers blessed (or cursed) with the Edmonds Community College station will soon have a chance to view yours truly on their public affairs program hosted by DJ Wilson, doing a very local version of "Meet the Press" with Democratic consultant Zach Silk. Amidst our breakdown of the last elections, we talked about how it takes different types of candidates to win in different types of legislative districts. Example: a liberal Democrat might be a decent fit for an urban district or suburban district close to Seattle. Farther out into the suburbs, it takes something different to win.
Case in point, a recent op-ed in the Everett Herald by State Senator Steve Hobbs (D-44th), representing Mill Creek, Snohomish, and Lake Stevens. That district could - and perhaps should - shift to the GOP quite easily. Yet, Democrats hold all three legislative slots because they keep running quality candidates (ideology aside) who have generally done a better job of showing they'll represent the district well. While some Democrats balk at affirming I-747, Hobbs wants to go even further by offering rebates on property tax bills.
Will it pass? Not likely. But the very fact it's being proposed speaks to the variations in constituencies in legislative districts and why both parties do their best when the pick candidates who fit the district they seek to represent.
Posted by Eric Earling at November 27, 2007 07:57 AM | Email ThisNow Eric, compare representative democracy to your pet government - Sound Transit. No representative democracy at ST, is there boy-o?
That government is run by a board that is hand picked by government functionaries. It is an odd duck among local governments in the United States of America: a government of, for and by political appointees that pulls several hundred million dollars a year out of local pockets.
ST does not in any sense purport to "speak[] to the variations in constituencies in legislative districts." There is no accountability to voters, taxpayers, or citizens at Sound Transit; there NEVER are "candidates who fit the district they seek to represent."
Anyone think that local taxing authority has been spending money wisely, and that it has plans to frugally spend the public's money going forward? Try proving it. Hint: you won't be able to.
Have questions about how that government is operating? Just pick up the phone and ask your representive running ST. Oh, yeah, right . . . you don't have one of those.
Displeased with the lack of performance (or the financing practices) of that government? Just vote the bums out. Oh, that's right . . . we can't do that.
Eric Earling should make it clear he likes representative democracy except when it comes to Sound Transit.
Posted by: just sayin' on November 27, 2007 08:30 AMAs for Rs in Snohomish County, isn't it the first person to raise their hand when no one steps forward?
Posted by: swatter on November 27, 2007 09:08 AMI was at a speech or session when Foreman was planning to run about 8-12 years ago and several Democrat politicos showed up to listen. Foreman's message resonated with them.
But, Foreman was from Eastern Washington and conservative capital of the State. If he were in Western Washington, I wonder if he wouldn't be called a moderate Republican in the likes of Evans and Spellman?
Too bad the Rs threw-up (figuratively and literally) Carlson and the candidate before him (can't even remember) for the governorship.
Posted by: swatter on November 27, 2007 09:21 AMIf what you are describing is true, then no wonder the republicn party in Sno County is not winning. I am an indie and will vote for a quality candidate of either party. There was a post from Crosscut and the point was the problem facing republicans was candidate recruitment.
There is a simsilar situation in King County. Republicans seem to have conceeded Seattle. Tim Burgess, although more onservative than most city council candidates, ran in the nonpartisan race as a dem. I think people are sick of loons of either party, even in Seattle.
The Democrats also cater to the senior who always vote. They routinely do the Medicscare and Social Security scares to round up that vote. Republicans want to reform the system, but how do you counter the scare tactics.
Democrats also cater to the supposed disenfranchised, whereas, in reality, it is the Republicans who care and share more than the Democrats. You can just refer to the various challenges posters here have made to the left to document their charitably contributions to society other than to rag on conservatives on these blogs. On this blog, it sometimes the most principled of commenters who give the most, whereas, I haven't heard one liberal type able to say what they do.
Therefore, you won't find many R candidates willing to run for office- they have much more important stuff to do- like raising kids, helping out in the community and just plain modest.
Posted by: swatter on November 27, 2007 09:47 AMThat was 1996, and the candidate was Ellen Craswell. And I don't want to offend Craswell supporters, but she was not a good candidate. And I heard on more than one occasion that a good amount of Ds crossed over in the primary and voted for her.
Posted by: jimg on November 27, 2007 10:01 AMHorrible, horrible days for Republicans.
Speaking of Inslee, isn't that a good example of Eric's point? He couldn't do it as a D in Spokane so he came over here and won as a D.
Posted by: swatter on November 27, 2007 10:30 AMOf course, your guess is as good as mine as to what the Washington State Legislature has to do with the Iraq War.
Have you seen the last polling.. she losing to the REP's.
Maybe you need another cheap beer to calm ya down!
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on November 27, 2007 11:48 AMYeah, and that poll turned out to be BS.
I for one welcome our new Clinton overlords. =)
1972 Cam Rahn Bay. 57th Medical
We had real beer & hard stuff.
Let me call BS on you Cato. I read the WHOLE story and NO-where did they say it was BS. They were surpised by the numbers and usually Zogby does polling by phone, not internet.
Not that I would have any faith in the Net.. IE Ron Paul nutters.
By the way Cato, John Zogby has been a dem supporter for sometime.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on November 27, 2007 01:20 PMWhat a ground pounder! 0-:
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on November 27, 2007 01:30 PMWho cares, an internet poll is an internet poll. Not reliable in the least. It's like Ron Paul, he's really big on the internet but not so much in reality.
But you support every other special interest group and their right to their beliefs though, but not pharmacists?
Like whom? I'm not the one advocating special bathrooms for Muslims to wash their feet before prayer.
BTW, I've never heard of a clerk refusing to sell a gun to a customer. Care to provide an example?
If Rite-Aid said they were no longer selling birth-control because it conflicts with their morals that would be their right. It's not up to the pharmacist to choose who he/she dispenses drugs too. Their job is to dispense the prescribed drugs in the appropriate doses as prescribed by a doctor and to follow the law while doing so. Much like it's the Wal-Mark clerk at the hunting counter to sell the guy provided the paperwork is in order for the purchase (ie buyer has passed the waiting period/background check).
The issue isn't an individual pharmacist refusing to sell a product to anyone. The issue is the right of the pharmaCY to carry or not carry any particular medicine.
The WalMart clerk selling guns cannot refuse to sell a weapon to anyone entitled to buy one; that is the employment agreement made with the store owner, a store owner who has made the decision on their own to carry guns; and an entirely different issue then Rossi's proper support of pharmacists who do not want to carry any particular drug in a pharmacy THEY own.
The issue isn't "who they dispense drugs" to. That has nothing to do with it.
The issue is should their property rights to determine what they will or will not offer be crushed and ignored by leftists who don't give a damn about rights beyond their own on the matter of protesting, shouting down those they disagree with, and showing an astounding political ignorance.
You know, like you have here?
Posted by: Hinton on November 27, 2007 03:01 PM1972 Cam Rahn Bay. 57th Medical
We had real beer & hard stuff.
Well hey, you only get the training beer in basic. Ya gotta wait for that first stripe to get the real stuff.
Posted by: RBW on November 27, 2007 03:02 PMThat's exactly what the issue is, the drugs are in back but the Pharmacist refuses to dispense them because his/her religious beliefs go by the 'every sperm is sacred' rule'. By dispensing them the pharmacist claims they are an accessory to an abortion.
But Rossi said through his campaign spokeswoman Thursday that he agrees with U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton's Nov. 8 ruling. He thinks pharmacists should have a right not to fill prescriptions, sending patients elsewhere."
If a store does not want to carry a drug that is their right. It's not the right of the pharmacist to refuse to dispense medication due to their religious beliefs. Much like the Wal-Mart employee cannot refuse to sell a handgun.
"Pharmacies also are REQUIRED to order new supplies of a drug if a patient asks for something that is not in stock."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003807209_webpharmacists27m.html
Clearly, the rule rightfully thrown out in federal court REQUIRED pharmacies to carry this drug.
Even *I* don't have a problem requiring a pharmacist to dispense a drug that the owner requires BE dispensed. That is a legitimate requirement of employment if known at the time of hire.
But this requirement goes far beyond that. And Rossi's support of this will not cost him a thing.
Posted by: Hinton on November 27, 2007 11:06 PMYou're actually incorrect. I'm on record saying I support governance reform for the alphabet soup of the Puget Sound region's transportation agencies. That will fold all the differing, local government entities on the issue under one organization with an elected board. I would much prefer either that or Sound Transit having an elected component to its own board.
Posted by: Eric Earling on November 28, 2007 07:10 AMI mistook your support for the ST2/RTID ballot measure as support of the unaccountable governments that would have been doing the taxing and spending had that abomination been approved.
Have a great day.
Posted by: just sayin' on November 28, 2007 10:59 AMRossi's support of individual pharmacists ability to NOT do the job they were hired for sends a great message to the youth of America. Just make up some BS excuse based on religion and you can keep not doing your job and get paid for it.
What an upstanding guy Rossi must be to actively advocate the values of laziness and excuse making.